• 1 Post
  • 83 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle

  • Ok but is there room for the idea that your intuitions are incorrect? Plenty of things in the world are counter-intuitive. ‘docker-compose up -d’ works the same whether it’s one container or fifty.

    Computer resources are measured in bits and clock cycles, not the number of containers and volumes. It’s entirely possible (even likely) that an all-in-one container will be more resource-heavy than the same services split across multiple containers. Logging from an all-in-one will be a jumbled mess, troubleshooting issues or making changes will be annoying, it’s worse in every way except the length of output from ‘docker ps’



  • I disagree with pretty much all of this, you are trading maintainability and security for easy setup. Providing a docker-compose file accomplishes the same thing without the sacrifice

    • separate volumes for configuration, data, and cache because I might want to put them in different places and use different backup strategies. Config and db on SSD, large data on spinning rust, for example.
    • separate container for the database because the official database images are guaranteed to be better maintained than whatever every random project includes in their image
    • separate networks because putting your reverse proxy on a different network from your database is just prudent





  • I haven’t done this recently enough to guide you on the details, but step zero is to decide whether you are certain you want to dual boot or not. It adds a lot of complexity and brittleness that is best avoided if at all possible.

    • Try to find Linux compatible replacements for the software you need.
    • if that doesn’t exist, see if you can run it on Linux with wine.
    • If that isn’t possible, consider running windows inside a virtual machine on Linux.
    • If you do want honest, bare-metal windows then using two different physical drives will be easier and more reliable. Ideally your laptop has room for two drives, otherwise you can dangle a USB SSD (not a flash drive). Windows won’t install to a USB drive but Linux doesn’t care.





  • traches@sh.itjust.workstoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldCloud storage/backup
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    So there’s a storage protocol called “S3” (I wanna say it stands for simple scalable storage?), first created by Amazon for AWS. Many types of software, including backup programs, have been designed to use it as a storage backend. There are now many S3 compatible providers, last I looked the best value was backblaze B2.

    You need a backup program with end-to-end encryption, S3 compatibility, and whatever other features you like. I use restic but it’s CLI only, there’s also borg backup and many others.

    If you encrypt locally with a good key, you don’t have to trust the remote storage provider. They just see a bunch of meaningless noise. Just don’t lose the key or your backup is useless.






  • I didn’t say it was stable, I specifically said it was unstable. Because it is. I said arch is reliable, which is a completely different thing.

    Debian is stable because breaking changes are rare. Arch is unstable because breaking changes are common. In my personal experience, arch has been very reliable, because said breaking changes are manageable and unnecessary complexity is low.


  • I could not disagree more. Arch is unstable in the meaning that it pushes breaking changes all the time, (as opposed to something like Ubuntu where you get hit with them all at once), but that’s a very different thing from reliability.

    There are no backported patches, no major version upgrades for the whole system, and you get package updates as soon as they are released. Arch packages are minimally modified from upstream, which also generally minimizes problems.

    The result has been in my experience outstandingly reliable over many years. The few problems I do encounter are almost always my own fault, and always easily recovered from by rolling back a snapshot.